Thank you.
I thank Mr. Clark for providing the letter.
However, I'm left with significant questions about that letter. It has not resolved the issue for me or, I think, all reasonable-thinking Canadians. There are still additional questions about the discrepancy between his testimony and the media reports. This letter has not clarified why he unequivocally said he did not discuss the upcoming purchase of the condo, when, clearly—according to media reports—he did.
I find it a little ironic that Mr. Clark thinks a simple letter is sufficient, given that his prior career was in the media. What is the entire responsibility of the media? Well, it's to test the evidence of people. Whether we look to journalism and democracy or to the court, we need to test the evidence. It could be that this is all completely understandable. That's why we'll have Mr. Clark come here, clear the air and provide that testimony. However, this letter is clearly insufficient. It's the reason that journalism exists. His former career was to test the evidence and make sure Canadians were comfortable with it. Quite frankly, we would be more than negligent, as a committee, if we didn't fulfill our obligation to Canadian taxpayers to find this out, because this letter does not resolve the discrepancy between his testimony and media reports.
Thank you.